Editing Battle of New Orleans (section)

==Legacy==
=== The battle in American historiography ===
The battle became historically important mainly for the meaning Americans gave it, particularly with respect to Jackson.  According to Matthew Warshauer, the Battle of New Orleans meant, "defeating the most formidable army ever arrayed against the young republic, saving the nation's reputation in the War of 1812, and establishing [Jackson] as America's preeminent hero."{{sfnp|Warshauer|2013|p=79–92}} News of victory "came upon the country like a clap of thunder in the clear azure vault of the firmament, and traveled with electromagnetic velocity, throughout the confines of the land."{{sfnp|Ward|1962|pp=4–5}}  Popular pamphlets, songs, editorials, speeches, and plays glorified Jackson's new, heroic image.

The [[The Eighth (United States)|Eighth of January]] was a federal holiday from 1828 to 1861, and it was among the earliest national celebrations, as "previously, Americans had only celebrated events such as the [[Fourth of July]] or George Washington's birthday on a national scale".{{sfnp|Stoltz|2012|pp=112-127}} The anniversary of the battle was celebrated as an American holiday for many years called "[[The Eighth (United States)|The Eighth]]".{{sfnp|Donning Co-NPS, ''The War of 1812''|2013|p=147}}{{sfnp|Stoltz|2017|p=147}}

The historiography has been revisited by contemporary historians. According to Troy Bickham, the American victory at New Orleans "did not have an impact on the war's outcome", but it shaped "how the Americans received the end of the war by creating the illusion of military victory."{{sfnp|Bickham|2017}} Benn notes that American popular memory  focused on the victories at [[Battle of Baltimore|Baltimore]], [[Battle of Plattsburgh|Plattsburgh]], and New Orleans to present the war as a successful effort to assert American national honor, or a Second War of Independence, in which the mighty [[British Empire]] was humbled and humiliated.{{sfnp|Benn|2002|pp=82–83}} In keeping with this sentiment, there is a popularly held view that Britain had planned to annex [[Louisiana Territory|Louisiana]] in 1815.{{sfnp|Eustace|2012|p=293}} The amoral depravity of the British, in contrast with the wholesome behavior of the Americans, has the "beauty and booty" story at the center of a popular history account of Jackson's victory at New Orleans.{{sfnp|Eustace|2012|p=212}} According to historian [[Alan Taylor (historian)|Alan Taylor]], the final victory at New Orleans had in that sense "enduring and massive consequences".{{sfnp|Taylor|2010|p=421}} It gave the Americans "continental predominance", while it left the indigenous nations dispossessed, powerless, and vulnerable.{{sfnp|Taylor|2010|p=437}}

=== The role played by riflemen of Jackson's army ===
"[[The Hunters of Kentucky]]" was a song written to commemorate Jackson's victory over the British at the Battle of New Orleans.{{sfnp|Stoltz|2017|p=15}} In both 1824 and 1828 Jackson used the song as his campaign song during his presidential campaigns.{{sfnp|Hickey|2006|p=347}}

"Hunters of Kentucky" propagated various beliefs about the war. One of them was calling the Pennsylvania Rifle the [[long rifle|Kentucky Rifle]].  Another was crediting the riflemen with the victory of the Battle of New Orleans, when it could be said it was Jackson's artillery that was actually responsible for the win. Finally, one stanza said that the British planned to ransack New Orleans, which was unlikely to happen.{{sfnp|Hickey|2006|p=348}}

In keeping with the idea of the conflict as a "second war of independence" against [[John Bull]], the narrative of the skilled rifleman in the militia had parallels with the myth of the [[Minuteman]] as the key factor in winning against the British.{{sfnp|Stoltz|2017|p=27}}{{NoteTag|<!--Wordsmithed from [[Minutemen]] Wikipedia article-->This plays into a common, now debunked, myth of both Minutemen and the organized colonial militias of New England that frequently portray them as untrained farmers who brought their own weapons to battle. As Gen. Galvin and other historians have proven, the Minutemen tended to get more training in line tactics and drill than the regular militia with some, through the efforts of their commanders ensuring their companies were well-armed. For example, Captain [[Isaac Davis (soldier)|Isaac Davis]], a gunsmith, trained his men in musketry and drill on his farm, also making sure that every man had a good musket, cartridge box, canteen, and bayonet.{{sfnp|Galvin|1989|p=149}}}}

The Kentucky militiamen were the worst equipped of Jackson's forces. Only a third were armed, lamented Jackson to Monroe.{{sfnp|Davis|2019|p=197}} On top of this, they were poorly clothed, and were weakened from the long journey. (This explains their poor performance against Thornton's troops on the Right Bank, where they were quickly routed. A court of inquiry cleared Colonel Davis of blame. The outcome was not to the satisfaction of the Kentuckians. Two years later, an account was published in the ''Kentucky Reporter'', that grossly exaggerated the Kentucky militia's resistance, whilst bringing into question the behavior of the Louisiana Militia and its commander.{{sfnp|Reilly|1976|p=321}}) Upon learning this, Jackson was purported to have quipped 'I never in my life seen a Kentuckian without a gun, a pack of cards, and a jug of whiskey.'{{sfnp|Buell|1904|p=423}}

The author [[Augustus Caesar Buell]] had a book about Jackson published posthumously. It contains his argument that the effect of the artillery, relative to riflemen, was negligible. He "provides the most authentic solution" by claiming to quote from a primary source document from a fictitious department of the British Army. He declared there were 3,000 men wounded or killed by rifle munitions, 326 by musket or artillery.{{sfnp|Buell|1904|p=40-42}} The numbers provided run counter to those in primary sources with known provenance.{{sfnp|Remini|1999|p=195}} Although there are contemporary secondary sources that champion the riflemen as the cause of this victory,{{sfnp|Remini|1999|p=146}} Ritchie notes the British reserve was 650 yards away from the American line, so never came within rifle range, yet suffered 182 casualties.{{sfnp|Ritchie|1969|p=13}} Owsley estimates that between 800 and 1200 privately owned rifles were used, with the majority of Jackson's men equipped with the musket.{{sfnp|Owsley|2000|pp=163-164}}

Histories of the battle, in particular those directed towards a popular audience, have continued to emphasize the part played by the riflemen.{{sfnp|Stoltz|2017|p=viii}}{{sfnp|NPS ''Americans Celebrate an Idealized Version of Their Militia''|2015}} In more recent years, starting with Brown in 1969, scholarship has revealed that the militia played a smaller role, and that most British casualties were attributed to artillery fire.{{sfnmp|Davis|2019|1p=316|Reilly|1976|2p=307|Stoltz|2017|3p=25}} The engineers who oversaw the erection of the ramparts, the enslaved persons of color who built them, and the trained gunners who manned the cannons have seen their contributions understated as a consequence of these popular histories that have been written since the [[Era of Good Feelings]].{{sfnp|Stoltz|2017|p=27}} Popular memory's omissions of the numerous artillery batteries, professionally designed earthworks, and the negligible effect of aimed rifle fire during that battle lulled those inhabitants of the South into believing that war against the North would be much easier than it really would be.{{sfnp|Stoltz|2017|p=47}} Owsley notes that De Tousard was adamant that the artillery fire broke the British, many of its gunners being of French extraction.{{sfnp|Owsley|2000|pp=163-164}}

Until fairly recently, "the supremacy of Kentucky and Tennessee rifles in deciding the battle was undisputed."{{sfnp|Ritchie|1969|p=8}} Whilst this is recognised in some contemporary sources as folklore,{{sfnp|NPS ''Americans Celebrate an Idealized Version of Their Militia''|2015}}{{sfnp|History Channel ''6 Myths About the Battle of New Orleans''|2015}}{{sfnp|Davis|2019|pp=316-320}} it is seen as an emblem of a bygone era in Kentucky. Yet, a bronze statue was dedicated in 2015 in honor of the local Soldier - Ephraim McLean Brank - who, as legend has it, was the "Kentucky rifleman" at the Battle of New Orleans. It is situated at Muhlenburg County Courthouse in Greenville, Kentucky.{{sfnp|KYANG, ''The Legend of Kentucky's Lone Marksman''|2019}} There are still those who are happy to cling to accounts of forefathers from their state, and how the "long riflemen killed all of the officers ranked Captain and above in this battle,"{{sfnp|Markgraf|2015}} and "Victory was made possible by an unlikely combination of oddly disparate forces, British logistic oversights and tactical caution, and superior American backwoods marksmanship."{{sfnp|Cummings|2023}}

==="Beauty and Booty" controversy===
After the battle, a claim was published by [[George Poindexter]], in a letter dated January 20 to the ''Mississippi Republican'', that Pakenham's troops had used "Beauty and Booty" as a [[Password#History|watchword]]:

{{quote|The watch-word and countersign of the enemy on the morning of the 8th was, BOOTY AND BEAUTY. Comment is unnecessary on these significant allusions held out to a licentious soldiery. Had victory declared on their side, the scenes of Havre de Grace, of Hampton, of Alexandria . . . would, without doubt, have been reacted at New Orleans, with all the unfeeling and brutal inhumanity of the savage foe with whom we are contending.{{sfnp|Poindexter|1815|pp=58–59}}}}

This was republished in [[Niles' Register]],{{sfnp|Poindexter|1815|pp=58–59}} the [[National Intelligencer]] on February 13, and other newspapers.{{sfnp|Eustace|2012|pp=213–215}} Whilst there were criticisms from the Federalist press, as well as from Poindexter's enemies, as to how reliable this information was, it was widely accepted elsewhere. Senator [[Charles Jared Ingersoll]] made direct reference to this in his speech to Congress on February 16, reproduced in full in the ''National Intelligencer''.{{sfnp|Eustace|2012|p=215}} He continued, in an elated manner, 'with the tidings of this triumph from the south, to have peace from the east, is such a fullness of gratification as must overflow all hearts with gratitude.'{{sfnp|Eustace|2012|p=215}} He saw the news of victory at New Orleans against an immoral foe, followed by news of peace, as a positive sentiment to unite the different peoples of the United States,{{sfnp|Eustace|2012|pp=216,220}} the zeitgeist of these postwar years later becoming known as the ''Era of Good Feelings''.

This watchword claim, as originated by Poindexter, was repeated in Eaton's "Life of General Jackson", first published in 1817. A second edition of this biography was published in 1824, when Jackson made his first presidential bid. Further editions were published for the presidential elections of 1828 and 1833.{{sfnp|Eustace|2012|p=229}} Editions from 1824 onwards now contained the claim that documentary evidence proved the watchword was used.{{sfnp|Eaton|1828|p=293}} As a consequence it was reproduced in a travelogue in 1833.{{sfnp|Stuart|1833|pp=142–143}}

Following the publishing of a [[Travel literature|travelogue]] in 1833, whereby the author James Stuart referred to the watchword,{{sfnp|Stuart|1833|pp=142–143}} this hitherto unknown controversy became known in Great Britain. In response to the author, five British officers who had fought in the battle, Keane, Lambert, Thornton, [[Edward Blakeney|Blakeney]] and Dickson, signed a rebuttal in August 1833. It is stated this was published in ''[[The Times]]'' by American sources,{{sfnmp|Arthur|1915|1p=216|Parton|1861|2p=225}} but this is not the case.{{NoteTag|A database search between January 1st and December 31st 1833 does not fetch the rebuttal signed by Blakeney et al.{{sfnp|Gale, ''The Times Digital Archive''|1982}} Meanwhile, in a letter from Stuart to Lambert dated August 24, 1833, "I have no other way of making the important information contained in your [rebuttal] communication generally known, than by sending it for insertion; in the public journals, and by requesting one of my friends at New York to have it inserted in newspapers published there and at Washington."{{sfnp|Stuart|1834|p=105}} In 1852, Ingersoll wrote, "In 1833, all the surviving British commanders... deemed it proper to publish, in an English journal [their rebuttal]."{{sfnp|Ingersoll|1852|p=241}} Which journal is not stated. A Scottish journal. Edinburgh Evening Courant, is the most likely.}} Niles's Register, which originally printed Poindexter's claim, then printed the British rebuttal with the editorial comment, "Six of the principal officers.... have distinctively denied any knowledge [of the watchword].. The following interesting documents have been sent us for insertion.":{{sfnp|Niles|Niles|Hughes|Beatty|1834|p=121}}

{{quote|We, the undersigned, serving in that army, and actually present, and through whom all orders to the troops were promulgated, do, in justice to the memory of that distinguished officer who commanded and led the attack, the whole tenor of whose life was marked by manliness of purpose and integrity of view, most unequivocally deny that any such promise (of plunder) was ever held out to the army, or that the watchword asserted to have been given out was ever issued. And, further, that such motives could never have actuated the man who, in the discharge of his duty to his king and country, so eminently upheld the character of a true British soldier.{{sfnp|Stuart|1834|pp=102–104}}}}

James Stuart's account was criticised by a veteran, Major Norman Pringle, who wrote several letters to the Edinburgh Evening Courant. In response, Stuart published a book to refute these criticisms.{{sfnp|Stuart|1834|pp=3–5}} He quoted Major Eaton as a reliable source, and later went on to comment that as a result of Stuart, it had become accepted the watchword was a falsehood.{{NoteTag|"Six extracts [taken in October 1833 from: New York journal of Commerce, New York Gazette and General Advertiser, Philadelphia Commercial Herald, New York Commercial Advertiser, New York American, New York Albion]..the Watchword... had been universally believed in the United States of America for eighteen years; and also shewing the good spirit with which the complete refutation of the statement had been received in America."{{sfnp|Stuart|1834|pp=106–108}}}} One quote from the book "certainly the refutation of the charge as stated in Major Eaton's Book is, though tardy, complete"{{sfnp|Stuart|1834|pp=107–108}} considered the matter closed. Notwithstanding the refutation, the story had benefited both Jackson and Eaton's political careers, who had nothing left to prove.{{sfnp|Eustace|2012|p=230}}

The publication of Eaton's book in Britain in 1834, and in subsequent editions, still contained the story of "booty and beauty". The British Ambassador, Sir [[Charles Richard Vaughan]] wrote to President Jackson about the matter. Vaughan wrote that Eaton 'expressed himself glad, that the report was at last contradicted' by the rebuttal, but there was no pressure on him to retract his comments from the Jackson biography.{{sfnp|LOC, ''Sir Charles B. Vaughan to Andrew Jackson''|2021}} There is no recounting in 1833 of Jackson's supposed encounter with the mystery Creole planter (Denis de la Ronde), as reported by S C Arthur (see below).

Arthur's 1915 publication, quoting from Parton's 1861 biography of Jackson, itself quoting extensively from Vincent Nolte's book published in 1854, has referred to a [[Louisiana Creole people|Creole]] planter reportedly visited a British military camp a few days prior to the battle, being welcomed in after claiming that he was supportive of a possible British takeover of the region. While dining at dinner with a group of British officers, the planter claimed he heard one officer offer the [[Toast (honor)|toast]] of "Beauty and Booty". After gathering information on Pakenham's battle plans, the planter left the camp the next day and reported the information he had gathered to Jackson; the rumor that the British were offering toasts to "Beauty and Booty" soon spread throughout New Orleans, in particular among the upper-class women of the city.{{sfnp|Arthur|1915|p=216}} Nolte's book reveals the 'planter' to be no other than Denis de la Ronde,{{sfnp|Nolte|1934|p=220}} the colonel commanding the Third Regiment of the Louisiana Militia.{{sfnp|Read the Plaque, ''Denis de La Ronde Site''|2023}}

In the years since the Treaty of Ghent, not only did Jackson's reputation benefit from his major victory against the British, but also from vilifying the British as an amoral foe, against whom a second war of independence had been fought. As a national hero, it facilitated his subsequent career in politics, and tenure as President of the United States.

===Political outcomes===
[[New England]] as a whole was against the war. The leaders of the [[Federalist Party]] of New England met at the [[Hartford Convention]] and decided to deliver a set of demands to the federal government in January 1815.{{sfnp|Morison|1968|p=38-54, 166}} The moderates were in charge and there was no proposal to secede from the union. When the Hartford delegation reached Washington word of the great American victory at New Orleans came and the Federalists were seen as traitors and anti-American; the Federalist Party was permanently ruined.{{sfnp|Howe|2007|p= 61, 90}}

The economic impact of the War of 1812 resulted in discord for those in the northern New England states harmed by the blockade. Their concerns were voiced through the [[Federalist Party]]. The [[Hartford Convention]] saw them discuss their grievances concerning the ongoing war and the political problems arising from the federal government's increasing power. Federalists were increasingly opposed to slavery, both on principle and because the [[Three-fifths Compromise]] gave a political advantage to their opponents, who gained increased representation because of the weight given to enslaved (and therefore disenfranchised) people. This had resulted in the [[Virginia Dynasty|dominance of Virginia]] in the presidency since 1800.

By the time the Federalist "ambassadors" got to Washington, the war was over and news of [[Andrew Jackson]]'s stunning victory in the Battle of New Orleans had raised American morale immensely. The "ambassadors" hastened back to Massachusetts, but not before they had done fatal damage to the Federalist Party. The Federalists were thereafter associated with the disloyalty and parochialism of the Hartford Convention and destroyed as a political force. Across the nation, Republicans used the great victory at New Orleans to ridicule the Federalists as cowards, defeatists and secessionists. Pamphlets, songs, newspaper editorials, speeches and entire plays on the Battle of New Orleans drove home the point.{{sfnp|Stoltz|2012|pp=112-127}}

The [[Era of Good Feelings]] resulted from the Battle of New Orleans. From 1815 to 1825 there was single-party rule in Washington and an overwhelming feeling of [[Americanism (ideology)|patriotism]] due to the extinction of the Federalist Party. The era saw the collapse of the Federalist Party and an end to the bitter partisan disputes between it and the dominant [[Democratic-Republican Party]] during the [[First Party System]].

Andrew Jackson served as the seventh [[president of the United States]] from 1829 to 1837.

The void left by the Federalist Party was replaced by the [[Whig Party (United States)]], which came into being in 1833, in opposition to Andrew Jackson, and his policies as President. The Whig Party fell apart in the 1850s due to divisions over the expansion of slavery. Once more, a division between southern and northern states came into being.

The victory at New Orleans effectively kept the United States unified for the next 45 years until the [[American Civil War]].

===Memorials===
[[File:ChalmetteMonumentRangerStairs.jpg|thumb|upright=.90|Chalmette Monument]]
The Louisiana Historical Association dedicated its Memorial Hall facility to Jackson on January 8, 1891, the 76th anniversary of the Battle of New Orleans.{{sfnp|Urquhart|1959|p=12}} The Federal government established a national historical park in 1907 to preserve the Chalmette Battlefield, which also includes the [[Chalmette National Cemetery]]. It features the 100-foot-tall Chalmette Monument and is part of the [[Jean Lafitte National Historical Park and Preserve]]. The monument was supposed to be at least 150 feet tall but the very soft and wet soil limited it to 100 feet.{{sfnp|HMDb, ''Chalmette Monument Marker''|2016}} A five-cent stamp in 1965 commemorated the sesquicentennial of the Battle of New Orleans and 150 years of peace with Britain. The bicentennial was celebrated in 2015 with a [[Non-denominated postage|Forever stamp]] depicting United States troops firing on British soldiers along Line Jackson.

Prior to the twentieth century the British government commonly commissioned and paid for statues of fallen generals and admirals during battles to be placed inside [[St Paul's Cathedral]] in [[London]] as a memorial to their sacrifices. Major Generals Pakenham and Gibbs were both memorialized in a statue at St Paul's that was sculpted by Sir [[Richard Westmacott]].{{sfnp|Imperial War Museums, ''Major General The Hon Sir E Pakenham and Major General S Gibbs''|2021}}

{| style="margin:auto;"
|[[File:Battle of NewOrleans 1965 Issue-5c.jpg|thumb|upright=.90|Sesquicentennial issue of 1965]]
|<!-- Deleted image removed: [[File:Battle of New Orleans stamp 2015.jpg|thumb|upright=.90|Bicentennial issue of 2015]] -->
|}